MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1482986815 · doi:10.1142/9789814299404_0005

India and the Global Demand for Commodities: Is there an Elephant in the Room?

2010· article· en· W1482986815 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Francis, Corinne Luu

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Scientific Studies in International Economics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommodityEconomicsInternational tradeEconomyBusinessDevelopment economicsAgricultural economicsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After 10 years of impressive growth, India is now the fourth largest economy in the world. Yet, to date, India's impact on global commodity markets has been muted. The authors examine how India's domestic and trade policies have distorted and constrained its demand for commodities. They find that India's industrial policies have altered the expansion path of its economy, putting the service sector to the forefront and likely reducing India's demand for metals. Sector-specific policies, such as those promoting self-sufficiency in agriculture, have altered India's demand for food commodities and its supplies of those commodities to international markets. Recent policy reforms in manufacturing have boosted output, which coincides well with an increase in India's demand for metals over the past 4–5 years. Continued policy reforms are likely to diminish the distorting influence of India's domestic and trade policies. India's demand for energy and metals should rise as some rebalancing occurs in its economic structure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Scientific Studies in International EconomicsSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207